How not to publish books the ICHR way: Despite having incurred expenses on translation, 224 manuscripts have been awaiting publication for decades

With the government deciding to set up a one-member inquiry committee to look into the irregularities in the Indian Council of Historical Research (ICHR), following a Mail Today exposé last week which revealed how one of its major research projects, ‘Towards Freedom’, has been going on for 43 years, with crores of rupees already spent on it, our investigation suggests that the above malpractice is just the tip of the iceberg.

The more shocking irregularity lies in the way some of our well-known historians have taken ICHR for a ride, in the name of the ‘Translation Project’.

While the books of these eminent historians have got published in several vernacular languages, there are more than 224 manuscripts which couldn’t see the light of day, even after the ICHR spent lakhs of rupees on translating them.

(From left) Romila Thapar, Bipan Chandra and Irfan Habib were the main beneficiaries of the translation project as their works were translated into Indian languages

Kapil Kumar, professor of history at IGNOU, who was also ICHR member-secretary in 2003-04, found over 224 manuscripts lying for publication for more than a decade.

“No efforts were made to publish them in spite of having incurred expenditure on their translation, etc,” he informed.

A recent Right To Information (RTI) application revealed that the ICHR didn’t take up the ‘Translation Project’ between 2004 and 2015, but a top HRD ministry official insisted that the academic body spent Rs 28.29 lakh in one year on translating books.

Arjun Dev, a prominent member of the ‘Towards Freedom’ project, shared, “I don’t think the project has been going on a big scale.

"One would hear the books of some historians being translated in some vernacular languages, but it’s not a regular phenomenon now.”

RELATED ARTICLES

Share this article

ICHR chairperson Y Sudershan Rao, when asked about the 224 manuscripts, said he would look into the matter, as “I have no details about it right now.”

But an ICHR official insisted that the actual number could be higher.

“It would much more than 224, for not many translated books have been published in the past 10 years, except the ones written by eminent historians,” he said, adding: “It is high time responsibility is fixed on those wasting public money on translating books and then leaving them to bite dust.”

But, then, what is the ‘Translation Project’ all about?

“The project began in April 1972 with the National Book Trust’s proposal to translate the Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan series on the history and culture of India, but a committee consisting of Romila Thapar, S Gopal, Satish Chandra and Tapan Raychaudhuri found these volumes edited by RC Majumdar ‘not suitable for translation into Indian languages’, and instead proposed to suggest alternative names,” informed AG Lal, who was part of the ICHR from the early 1970s till the mid-2000s.

The JNU City centre in New Delhi

Interestingly, the main beneficiaries of this last-minute change were the very people who proposed it — the late RS Sharma, the first ICHR chairperson, S Gopal, Romila Thapar, Bipan Chandra, Irfan Habib, his father Mohammad Habib, and of course Satish Chandra!

While these historians were not paid any royalties for these works, they were indeed given “a lump sum for translation rights”, which if combined with the inflationary rise over the decades, would turn into a hefty sum for each historian.

“Today, it can easily be in lakhs for each of the beneficiaries,” confessed an old ICHR hand, not willing to be named.

"For Dev, however, the government’s move to set up an inquiry committee is aimed at diverting people’s attention from its saffronisation agenda.

“If anything, the government’s move is political in nature, rather than academic.

"It is a tactic to divert attention from the incompetence of some of the individuals put up by the government at such academic bodies,” said the historian.

Prof Kumar begged to differ.

Emphasising that corruption in ICHR went deeper, and at the highest level too, he recalled how the then ICHR chairperson during his stint as member-secretary wanted him to reimburse his mobile phone bills and half of the electricity bill at his residence.

“I refused to clear these bills as the CAG had objected to such reimbursements being made to the former chairperson,” he said.

The IGNOU professor also shared how the chairperson he worked under was not just a defaulter of an ICHR project but also had “violated the Research Funding rules of ICHR”.

But what takes the cake is the incident where the then ICHR chairperson mentioned the name of one Prof Shabir Mohammad to be contacted and be requested for a paper for the Indian delegation’s visit to Turkey.

“This Prof Shabir Mohammad was converted into Mr Shabi Ahmed by the dealing Deputy Director and whose own name is Mr Shabi Ahmed.

This file never went back up to the chairperson,” recalled Prof Kumar.

Said a senior HRD ministry official said, “There’s corruption at all levels in ICHR. I don’t think a one-member inquiry committee can look into the length and breadth of its malfunction within a month.

"It needs at least three months, more so because some of the documents are no longer with the HRD ministry or the ICHR, but with an old academician who is not keeping well.”

'Ram Temple a political problem'

Indian Council of Historical Research (ICHR) chairperson Y Sudershan Rao

The Aodhya problem is not a historical one; it is rather political, said Indian Council of Historical Research (ICHR) chairperson Y Sudershan Rao.

Speaking at a conference held on the Ayodhya issue under the aegis of RSS-affiliated Akhil Bharatiya Itihas Sankalan Yojna (ABISY), Sudershan Rao reiterated that Ramayana was based on historical facts.

While ICHR member and historian Minakshi Jain of Delhi University’s Gargi College presented a paper on the body of evidence to support the contention of the existence of the Ram Temple, textual and excavations included, Rao appealed to sentiment.

“I visited Ayodhya. I was passing through the streets of Ayodhya and I felt as if I was living in Ramayana times. It is not myth for me, it is my concrete experience.

"One can feel the existence of those times in these modern times. What more proof do you want when you are convinced in your mind, heart and soul?

"So Ayodhya exists for those who believe in Ram and that he was born there and lived there,” said Rao speaking at the National Museum.

“Valmiki Ramayana was based on objective truth about Ram. Valmiki never said Ram was an ‘avatar’ for him, but cited that other sages considered Ram a divine incarnate. Valmiki was a historian by himself and was in fact first historiographer,” said Rao.

Lashing out at the Left-leaning historians, Rao said, “We can convince our Muslim brethren, but the real problem is our Leftist historians who are not ready to accept the evidence (of existence of Ram Temple in Ayodhya).

"They want us to give objective evidence. We have several examples, but which they refuse to recognise,” said Rao.

“Sudershan Rao does not have the academic credentials to become even an ICHR member, leave aside the chairperson.

"Also, he does not have the specialisation to comment on the Ayodhya issue as he claims to be one on early modern Indian history and that too only on South India. So he can say what he wants,” quipped a JNU history professor who did not want to be named.

“In ICHR we have a project, a multi-volume set on inscriptions, and the volume pertaining to the Ayodhya excavations has been questioned and not been cleared by earlier experts of the body.

"They said the inscription found inside the Babri structure was not actually found at the site, but smuggled from outside.

"But, then they cannot answer where it came from and how it was sneaked inside a site that was under close watch,” Rao said.